0
   

The Jews in Italy

 
 
Reply Sun 2 Apr, 2006 01:17 pm
Moishe and the Pope


Several centuries ago, the Pope decreed that all the Jews had to convert or leave Italy. There was a huge outcry from the Jewish community, so the Pope offered a deal. He would have a religious debate with the leader of the Jewish community. If the Jews won, they could stay in Italy, if the Pope won, they would have to leave.


The Jewish people met and picked an aged, but wise Rabbi Moishe to represent them in the debate. However, as Moishe spoke no Italian, and the Pope spoke no Yiddish, they all agreed that it would be a "silent" debate.


On the chosen day, the Pope and Rabbi Moishe sat opposite each other for a full minute before the Pope raised his hand and showed three fingers.


Rabbi Moishe looked back and raised one finger.


Next, the Pope waved his finger around his head.


Rabbi Moishe pointed to the ground where he sat.


The Pope then brought out a communion wafer and a chalice of wine.


Rabbi Moishe pulled out an apple.


With that, the Pope stood up and declared that he was beaten, that Rabbi Moishe was too clever, and that the Jews could stay.


Later, the Cardinals met with the Pope, asking what had happened. The Pope said, "First, I held up three fingers to represent the Trinity. He responded by holding up one finger to remind me that there is still only one God common to both our beliefs. Then, I waved my finger to show him that God was all around us. He responded by pointing to the ground to show that God was also right here with us. I pulled out the wine and wafer to show that God absolves us of all our sins. He pulled out an apple to remind me of the original sin. He had me beaten and I could not continue."


Meanwhile the Jewish community was gathered around Rabbi Moishe. "How did you win the debate?" they asked.


"I haven't a clue," said Moishe. "First he said to me that we had three days to get out of Italy, so I gave him the finger. Then he tells me that the whole country would be cleared of Jews and I said to him, we're staying right here."


"And then what?" asked a woman. "Who knows?" said Moishe, "He took out his lunch, so I took out mine."
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,609 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:16 am
I dunno, CI. I don't get this as being funny by itself and I know some of the history...
I'll look at it again, re funny.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:22 am
I have difficulty remembering if it was Pius IV or V or Paul III, IV, or V who started the ghetto arrangement. Early 1500's, I think. So the joke, assumed joke, sent me off to check my data.

But, I still don't get why it could be funny.... with the best of intents. Something about eating your finger?

You can see I don't think it's funny.

I know every single thing is game for humor in some circumstances, and agree with that, with qualms. But I genuinely don't get this.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:29 am
I keep reading it and not getting it.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:41 am
This sounds a tad over pleasant to me, but is a glimpse.
May be the first official ghetto, not sure. Venice's is very old.
oops, forgot the link, back in a minute.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:44 am
maybe this will help. it's an Islamic variant of the same joke.

A philosopher stopped Mulla Nasrudin on the street.
In order to test whether the Mulla
was sensitive to philosophical knowledge
he made a sign, pointing at the sky.
The philosopher meant: There is only one truth,
which covers all.
Nasrudin's companion, an ordinary man, thought:
The philosopher is mad.
I wonder what precautions Nasrudin will take.
Nasrudin looked in his knapsack and took out a coil
of rope.
This he handed to his companion.

Excellent, thought the companion.
We will bind him up if he becomes violent.

The philosopher saw that Nasrudin meant:
Ordinary humanity tries to find truth by methods
as unsuitable as attempting to climb into the sky
with a rope.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 12:50 am
I'll go back and read what you posted, Yit...

It was Paul IV. I may have to work myself up to a joke..

in the meantime -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Paul_IV
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 01:07 am
OK, both are stories (not jokes in the comedian sense, that threw me off....) re chasm of miscommunication... - to me.

Is that how CI sees it (or them?)
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 01:10 am
Also, yitwail, thank you, that was clarifying.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 01:16 am
miscommunication, definitely, but i also think they poke fun at religious symbolism.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 01:16 am
Re: The Jews in Italy
cicerone imposter,
That was ******* great man!
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 02:00 am
I still don't get why it was great.

Let me know when you feel up to it.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 02:13 am
(I don't mind the pope being camfloogled. Was that what was funny?)
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 02:33 am
ossobuco wrote:
I still don't get why it was great.
The pope thought the Rabbi was communicating and responding in a deeply symbolic and meaningful way but the Rabbi did not have a clue what all the implications were that the pope thought he was making to the Rabbi.

There is also the underlying implication that simply because you perceive there to be meaning and depth it does not mean that there is meaning and depth.

There is also the underlying implication that meaning and perception are in the eyes of the beholder.

There is also the implication that due to the intellectual traditions of Jewish culture that the Rabbis' communications to the Pope must have deep and more thoughtful meaning than the Pope's.

There is also the implication that two people will not be able to really understand each other, but may appear to do so at least from one perspective.

There is also the implication that in spiritual matters there can be no right or wrong as there is no proof and all is a matter of perception and belief.

There is lots more........

What Is Humor
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 07:46 am
if i may add 1 more implication, there's the ambiguity about who it's poking fun at; that's unlike your typical joke, of course, but there's typical jokes aplenty already.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 08:13 am
Heeheehee ... I saw this one before, but I'd forgotten it, and it's still clever Razz

(Re: Osso's request for explanation:)

I think it's a cute and inventive send-up of religious self-importance, of the empty pooha of religious symbology. And it's delivered in classic fashion by the prototype character in Jewish jokes, the smart yet 'earthy' and no-nonsense elder (kind of an (unintendedly) smart-ass version of the idiot savant, the Jewish equivalent to the Good Soldier Svejk)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 08:25 am
I would also guess - just to continue the digression in re: to Osso's question - that this joke originated by Jews rather than about Jews. The whole anecdotal, ambiguous character of the joke is that of a typical Jewish joke. Then there's the typical contrast between the philosophical nature of the joke and the plot that at the same time serves to cleverly take down that philosophical connotation a peg or two.

Can't find anything about the history of the joke back thru Google yet tho. But I'll note that among many other places, it was featured on the Humor page of KOACH, "a project off The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism".
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 08:49 am
Yes, I thought so <nods>. This joke is actually mentioned on the Wikipedia page about Jewish humour (under "Types of Jewish humor">"About Other Religions").

The page introduces Jewish humor as "verbal, self-deprecating and often anecdotal humor" - which all applies to this joke, too - with a long tradition. It proceeds to outline two elements of that tradition, and both of those, I would say, return in this joke:

Quote:
Jewish humor is rooted in at least two traditions. The first is the intellectual and legal methods of the Talmud, which uses elaborate legal arguments and situations often seen as so absurd as to be humorous in order to tease out the meaning of religious law. The second is an egalitarian tradition among the Jewish communities of Eastern Europe in which the powerful were often mocked subtly, rather than attacked overtly -- as Saul Bellow once put it, "oppressed people tend to be witty."

The first tradition shows up in the first half of the joke. One could say that the Pope is shown arguing like one of those wise men in the Talmudian tradition, teasing out religious lessons from pedestrian acts. And the Pope's explanation of Moishe's lessons does indeed hint at some deeper religious truths - and by the by ascribes the greater, more profound wisdom regarding those to the Jew.

But instead of just letting it stand like that, the second half of the joke then proceeds to laugh all that poohah apart again. One could speculate that this is actually a self-deprecatory mocking of one's own community's traditional elders - with the Pope still functioning as proxy for the wise Jews of Talmudian anecdote. But one could also submit that this 'taking down a peg' actually again reinforces the notion that the more profound wisdwom is always the more plain, and less bombastic one - the one that Jews are better at than those self-important Catholics who can't take a joke..

The second half of the joke clearly serves to show up how the Jews can take a (self-deprecatory) joke. Yet, like a double-edged sword, of course it actually mocks the pope as much or more as Moise... and this fits with the Wiki description of the powerful oppressor being "mocked subtly, rather than attacked overtly" - being mocked through the seeming appearance of self-mocking.

Nobody can go aggro at a Jew making a joke that seemingly makes another Jew (Moishe) look stupid - even when it's clear to all that it's actually the Pope who's being made to look like a fool. Clever - in the kind of cleverness that Jews have needed to survive.

Well, all that - or I'm waaaay overthinking this Razz Laughing
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 08:58 am
From the same Wiki page, another Jewish joke that appears to make the prototypical Jew in the joke look stupid, while in reality of course it's targeted at the (hostile) other ...:

Quote:
During the days of oppression and poverty of the Russian shtetls, one village had a rumor going around: a Christian girl was found murdered near their village. Fearing a pogrom, they gathered at the synagogue.

Suddenly, the rabbi came running up, and cried, "Wonderful news! The murdered girl was Jewish!"
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2006 09:09 am
Aw, I was all set to explain (hadn't seen this before), nimh's is pretty thorough.

I liked it!

The whole thing is the archetype of the rabbi story -- Isaac Bashevis Singer has told/ retold a lot of them. ("When Schlemiel Went to Warsaw", etc.) In this one, the wise rabbi and the Schlemiel/ fool roles are sort of fused; more usually the rabbi would be definitely, purposely wise, and the schlemiel would be the one bumbling through and somehow accidentally winning despite himself.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Oddities and Humor - Discussion by edgarblythe
Let's play "Caption the Photo" II - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
JIM NABORS WAS GOY? - Question by farmerman
Funny Pictures ***Slow Loading*** - Discussion by JerryR
Caption The Cartoon - Discussion by panzade
Geek and Nerd Humor - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Caption The Cartoon Part Deux - Discussion by panzade
IS IT OK FOR ME TO CHEAT? - Question by Setanta
2008 Election: Political Humor - Discussion by Robert Gentel
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Jews in Italy
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 04:52:09